LANSING, Mich. (WLNS) – The carrying of firearms is a controversial topic among many.

Some say it should be banned altogether, while others believe with the proper licensing, a person should be able to open carry.

But, a new gun proposal introduced in the Michigan House is looking to make a few changes to the state’s current law.

“Constitutional Carry basically says that without any checks, everybody has the right to carry,” said 24th District State Senator Rick Jones.

Under Michigan law, a person has to have the proper license to open carry.

Logged

"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed " - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Except as otherwise provided in this act, a person shall not purchase, carry, possess, or transport a pistol in this state without first having obtained a license for the pistol as prescribed in this section.

Ok I just finished reading everything that I could find that may be pertinent to this article and nothing came up on the new bill.The list of everything is referenced to the original bill of 1927 part MC 28.422 and yes it is stated that you have to have license.

So, if the bill passes, no LTC needed if you're over 21 and lawfully entitled to possess (which I assume means you've registered it with the State).

Includes duty to inform upon contact with LE, and empowers LE to detain you and investigate your lawful carry, just in case it might prove to be unlawful. -I'm not pleased with this part. It's like saying that seeing somebody operating a motor vehicle is probable cause to stop them and make sure they're licensed to drive that vehicle.

Logged

"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed " - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Of course, anyone who actually is prohibited from possessing (and therefore carrying) a firearm cannot be compelled to disclose that they are carrying a firearm.

I'd be interested to see the constitutionality of the bit allowing detention challenged, but I'm afraid we'd wind up with a ruling that the government's interest in ensuring that they aren't turning loose prohibited persons with firearms outweighs any private interest in not being detained while police "make sure you're legal."

As I read it, they would still need a reason (excuse) to make a stop, at which point the person stopped (if carrying legally) would be required to disclose and the officer would be authorized to prolong the stop in order to verify. That's not to say that some departments wouldn't need to be bench-slapped. Currently, anyone carrying with a license has a duty to disclose when stopped and an obligation to provide their license upon request. At that point, you're kind of stuck until the officer gives your license back. This doesn't seem like it was meant to be a huge change from status quo, as far as police interaction goes. It's bad, but that's because it's based on what we already have. This fixes one problem, but it doesn't fix all of them.

Snip... Currently, anyone carrying with a license has a duty to disclose when stopped and an obligation to provide their license upon request. At that point, you're kind of stuck until the officer gives your license back. ...Snip

Are you sure about this? I was under the impression that the obligation was to show the CPL? In any disclosure situation that doesn't require providing ID (such as a traffic stop), I don't believe that any documents must leave your possession.

Logged

"I don't want to be someone that successfully defends himself with a pistol. I want to be someone that never has to defend himself with a pistol."-Bronson, 2013

"Its not what I do for a living, its that I want to keep doing it"-Evil Creamsicle, 2010

Are you sure about this? I was under the impression that the obligation was to show the CPL? In any disclosure situation that doesn't require providing ID (such as a traffic stop), I don't believe that any documents must leave your possession.

I hadn't meant to indicate that the license must be handed over, poor word choice on my part. Good call, words mean things.MCL 28.425f says show:

Quote

2) An individual who is licensed to carry a concealed pistol and who is carrying a concealed pistol or a portable device that uses electro-muscular disruption technology shall show both of the following to a peace officer upon request by that peace officer:

(a) His or her license to carry a concealed pistol.(b) His or her state-issued driver license or personal identification card.

If you have the good fortune to be stopped by an officer who knows how to look with his eyes, you're doing better than I am.